PDA

View Full Version : Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes Divorcing



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

Rafter
07-13-2012, 06:20 PM
But she apparently has a big mouth. Or Tom does. Or someone's lawyer does. Otherwise, how would anyone know? And you would think that if these people actually did have such a contract, saying anything to anyone would be a violation of terms, and ethics, and several other things, not to mention a rather startling confession with a lot of specific details.

Contract details get leaked all the time about various things.

It's probably some junior associate at some law firm that leaked, or Nicole's sister, or some no-name CoS member. I don't really think the term "confidential" means much anymore.

michiruwater
07-13-2012, 06:30 PM
Is there some reason that we should believe the junior associate or no-name CoS member is telling the truth about the contract?

Someone saying, "I have relatives in X, and they said X about X controversy" never actually gives me the impression that said relatives know what they're talking about or are being honest. Maybe if I hadn't seen that particular form of gossip dozens upon dozens of times on the internet.

Wyliefan
07-13-2012, 06:53 PM
Contract details get leaked all the time about various things.

It's probably some junior associate at some law firm that leaked, or Nicole's sister, or some no-name CoS member.

Or Tessa's sister. (Sorry, I know that joke is ancient by now!)

heckles
07-13-2012, 07:21 PM
Dianetics was never marketed as fiction. It started out being sold as a self help/improvement method- although the ads for it did run in SF and other pulp magazines.

One could argue that placing Dianetics in the Religion section would also be inappropriate because Hubbard himself was anti-religion when he wrote it, and did not market the book as a religious text when it was first released. Scientology only claimed religious status later with the government when they found it benefited the group legally and financially. Even with that legal status, the group actually defines itself as an "applied religious philosophy". Maybe the book should be in the Philosophy section?

Really, a book store can't win with where they place this work. It would be questionable to shelve the book in the Psychology section, because the group is opposed to psychology as most people define it. The book probably shouldn't be placed in the Science section either, since none of the theories within have been verified scientifically.

Prancer
07-13-2012, 08:11 PM
Contract details get leaked all the time about various things.

It's probably some junior associate at some law firm that leaked, or Nicole's sister, or some no-name CoS member. I don't really think the term "confidential" means much anymore.

Ah, so basically this is the rumor going around town and not something your relatives heard from one of the actual parties involved?

On the Survivor boards, that's known as a "My uncle the cameraman" story.

So they don't actually know anything more concrete than your average National Enquirer reader.

Rafter
07-13-2012, 08:22 PM
Of course. That's very true. I was just relaying what the scuttlebutt in Hollywood is/was about Tom and Nicole. It's up to you whether you want to believe it.

One thing I'm curious about with Tom and Katie is what ever happened to their friendship with the Beckhams?

Jenny
07-13-2012, 08:23 PM
So they don't actually know anything more concrete than your average National Enquirer reader.

I think that's a bit harsh. We're all speculating based on the info at hand, and Rafter was just sharing some tidbits she'd heard. It's not like anyone else is offering the credentials of their sources or written proof - even media stories often present "facts" and only offer an unnamed "source close to the situation."

Sure, it might just be gossip, but it's also possible that Rafter knows what her sources do for a living, who they might know, and ways they might have found things out, and has therefore chosen to believe what they say.

I've heard things about celebrities in the past - and goodness knows we've all heard tons of skating gossip over the years - and based on what I know of the sources, I choose to believe them or not. I'm not always going to share exactly who those people are or why I choose to believe them, to either protect them or to protect my own identity on an anonymous message board. People can believe them or not, and I don't see the harm in sharing in a thread that is already filled with gossip and rumour and speculation.

After all, this icon exists for a reason, no? :sekret:

Prancer
07-13-2012, 08:27 PM
Of course. That's very true. I was just relaying what the scuttlebutt in Hollywood is/was about Tom and Nicole.

I know; I totally understand that. That's been the scuttlebutt around Hollywood for years and it's been widely publicized. But there's gossip and there's gossip.

IceAlisa
07-13-2012, 08:34 PM
Actually, MY uncle the cameraman heard the same story about Tom and Nicole and TomKat. ;)

In all seriousness, I know several people, an agent and someone working for a major studio who say this is common knowledge in the Industry. And that Tom is not the only one doing it. I don't think you will get this in writing, though, Prancer.

kwanfan1818
07-13-2012, 08:39 PM
eta- Dianetics was never marketed as fiction. It started out being sold as a self help/improvement method- although the ads for it did run in SF and other pulp magazines.

Short, snappy ads for "Dianetics" were run on local TV stations in the NY Metro area when I was growing up, and it was touted as a self-help book. I'm surprised that's not where I would find it in a bookstore, were I looking.

liv
07-13-2012, 08:41 PM
And sometimes these "unimportant" people actually do know the truth and tell others but people don't believe them because they are not official sources. And those same sources would never go on record as saying they said those things because it would put their jobs in danger. Only when things are offically confirmed do people actually believe them, and then that official stuff isn't true but just spin. Many things are common knowledge, but it will never be official.

Prancer
07-13-2012, 08:44 PM
Actually, MY uncle the cameraman heard the same story about Tom and Nicole and TomKat. ;)

In all seriousness, I know several people, an agent and someone working for a major studio who say this is common knowledge in the Industry. And that Tom is not the only one doing it. I don't think you will get this in writing, though, Prancer.

I'm not expecting to get it in writing. And as I said, I am aware that this story has been around for years; it's been very well-publicized for almost two decades now. It's been hard to miss.

But Rafter said it was probably a junior associate who leaked the details of the contract.

That indicates to me that the source is unknown and came to Rafter's source at least secondhand (and probably more distantly than that), which means it's a story that is floating around. Lots of stories float around. It may be true or it may not be true, but the fact that it came from people in Hollywood doesn't make it any more true. Are all the rumors you hear at work true?

Jenny
07-13-2012, 08:57 PM
But Rafter said it was probably a junior associate who leaked the details of the contract.

Well again, sources aren't always named, and we can only guess where it might have come from.

But if the person the info came from is confident in their source, and you're confident about that person's judgement, then you might be inclined to believe it yourself without knowing the original source.

And it doesn't always have to be someone connected - might have just been someone who happened to overhear something, or came across a few random facts and put them together. For example, cab drivers, restaurant staff, hotel staff, repairman etc hear all kinds of things in the course of their work because they tend to fade into the background while people yack away on their cellphones not realizing they've been recognized or that others might figure out who and what they are talking about.

Prancer
07-13-2012, 09:33 PM
But if the person the info came from is confident in their source, and you're confident about that person's judgement, then you might be inclined to believe it yourself without knowing the original source.

Yes, Jenny. And yes, people often put things together from what they hear and yes, it's often the support staff and household help and other anonymous types who are the best sources, as they know everything and are usually undervalued.

I do get all that.

But having been the subject of persistent rumors myself, I am not inclined to think that all of them have validity just because they are common.

I have no trouble at all believing that Tom is gay, or that he has is celibate, or that actresses would marry him to advance their careers. Why not?

For me, the hard part of that to swallow is the duration of the sham marriage. Ten years is a hell of a long time to put up a front, good actors or not, particularly since there was (to the best of my knowledge) nary a breath of talk about affairs until the very end. I also realize that Tom has firm control over the publicity machine and so talk of affairs would be squelched--or would it? After all, people talked about the marriage contract and I doubt that he liked that, but it doesn't appear he was able to stop it from circulating.

If you were in a sham marriage, could you pull it off for 10 years? Would you be willing to even agree to 10 years of a sham marriage? By all accounts, Nicole desperately wanted to have children; that's 10 childbearing years she could never get back. And to bring children into a sham marriage, that was going to end? That's just cruel; you are forcing the children to live the lie along with you. For the rumor to be true, Nicole would have to be cold hearted and selfish and ambitious to a fault. And maybe she is (and that's the real reason she has a frozen face :P). But I'm willing to give her the benefit of doubt. I think the same of Katie. For her to have a child and pass it off as Tom's, and for her to subject that child and herself (and her family) to a sham marriage that she knew was going to end, she would have to a very cold, calculating, ambitious person. Neither of these women were in some sort of desperate situation where they were doing what they had to do to survive; they were doing it (if the rumors are true) for publicity and career advancement.

That's what I find hard to swallow.

Jenny
07-13-2012, 09:56 PM
For me, the hard part of that to swallow is the duration of the sham marriage. Ten years is a hell of a long time to put up a front, good actors or not, particularly since there was (to the best of my knowledge) nary a breath of talk about affairs until the very end. I also realize that Tom has firm control over the publicity machine and so talk of affairs would be squelched--or would it? After all, people talked about the marriage contract and I doubt that he liked that, but it doesn't appear he was able to stop it from circulating.

If you were in a sham marriage, could you pull it off for 10 years? Would you be willing to even agree to 10 years of a sham marriage? By all accounts, Nicole desperately wanted to have children; that's 10 childbearing years she could never get back. And to bring children into a sham marriage, that was going to end? That's just cruel; you are forcing the children to live the lie along with you. For the rumor to be true, Nicole would have to be cold hearted and selfish and ambitious to a fault. And maybe she is (and that's the real reason she has a frozen face :P). But I'm willing to give her the benefit of doubt. I think the same of Katie. For her to have a child and pass it off as Tom's, and for her to subject that child and herself (and her family) to a sham marriage that she knew was going to end, she would have to a very cold, calculating, ambitious person. Neither of these women were in some sort of desperate situation where they were doing what they had to do to survive; they were doing it (if the rumors are true) for publicity and career advancement.

That's what I find hard to swallow.

Oh for sure - when you put it like that, I'm with you. I had the impression that you weren't buying it because you felt the source wasn't credible and it was just the same old rumours going around in circles.

I think it might go back to the earlier fairy tale discussion. When Nicole met Tom her career was just starting IIRC, and maybe at that point in her life she felt that he was her ticket to everything she wanted, not just money and career, but also love and family etc. Then - totally speculating here - more and more she realizes that Tom has his own life in Scientology and who knows what, but that's OK because her career is taking off too, and half they time they are off on film shoots anyway, but she still hopes that one day it will be like the beginning, when they were in love and contracts and things were just business but not what they were really about.

For Katie, maybe it was about the fairytale all along, not career or money at all, and she too went along in the hopes that over time they'd settle into being a normal family with beautiful children and it would all work out. Only by then, Tom was much further up the ladder with Scientology, and being older than her, perhaps much more set in his ways, so she realized this wasn't what she wanted after all, and took steps to get out.

In other words, maybe it's all true - there really was a 10 year contract with Nicole, she really did hope to advance her career and live the good life, but she also loved him and wished that the contract didn't matter as much as did in the end. And maybe it's all true with Katie too - there was a contract, she knew he was going to do things his way, but she decided it was worth it to live the fairytale so went along with it, until she decided it wasn't worth it anymore.